Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-07-2008, 12:41 AM   #11 (permalink)
ECO-Evolution
 
Lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,482

Iron Horse (retired) - '97 Iron horse Intrepid

Ninja - '08 Kawasaki 250R
90 day: 76.23 mpg (US)
Thanks: 17
Thanked 43 Times in 32 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by capn View Post
my goal with a restrictor plate is not to limit my power use, rather the engines output and consumption.

I am also not trying to reduce pumping losses, this is just adding more restrictions in hopes it might trick the MAF that the engine needs less fuel. Although testing is required.
I would say Metro's right.

I tried a restrictor plate with no luck. I reduced the intake to a hole about 1" in diameter. There was an increase in FE but the car was undrivable.The top speed was 55 mph( took 65 seconds to get there at 85% throttle position, just before open loop) but the acceleration rate was unsafe. If I increase the diameter to where I could accelerate the FE advantage went away. YMMV (Your mileage may very.)

__________________
"Judge a person by their questions rather than their answers."

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-07-2008, 12:52 AM   #12 (permalink)
Goal: Save the world
 
capn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Charlotte North Carolina
Posts: 10

Caddy - '94 Cadillac Eldorado ETC
90 day: 20 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazarus View Post
I would say Metro's right.

I tried a restrictor plate with no luck. I reduced the intake to a hole about 1" in diameter. There was an increase in FE but the car was undrivable.The top speed was 55 mph( took 65 seconds to get there at 85% throttle position, just before open loop) but the acceleration rate was unsafe. If I increase the diameter to where I could accelerate the FE advantage went away. YMMV (Your mileage may very.)

what kind of increase in FE did you see? I have figured that I can stay under 2500 rpms and still have decent acceleration, but thats a pretty light throttle.
__________________
"what gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. Its what we know for sure that just ain't so." ~Mark Twain
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 01:00 AM   #13 (permalink)
Pokémoderator
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,864

1999 Saturn SW2 - '99 Saturn SW2 Wagon
Team Saturn
90 day: 40.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 439
Thanked 527 Times in 354 Posts
capn -

Welcome to EM! Wow, 3740 lbs ... how much does the front passenger seat weigh?

Does that car already feature cylinder deactivation? Since it's a V8, it might be a candidate, but it might be too difficult to implement.

What do the other (real) experts think?

CarloSW2
__________________

What's your EPA MPG? Go Here and find out!
American Solar Energy Society
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 01:15 AM   #14 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Regina SK Canada
Posts: 407

Red Jeep Patriot - '07 Jeep Patriot
90 day: 25.14 mpg (US)

Beige Ford Ranger - '95 Ford Ranger XLE
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Those ETCs are really nice cars. Cadillac Northstar, right? I would've thought the aluminum engine would be more efficient.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 02:40 AM   #15 (permalink)
Goal: Save the world
 
capn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Charlotte North Carolina
Posts: 10

Caddy - '94 Cadillac Eldorado ETC
90 day: 20 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfg83 View Post
capn -

Welcome to EM! Wow, 3740 lbs ... how much does the front passenger seat weigh?

Does that car already feature cylinder deactivation? Since it's a V8, it might be a candidate, but it might be too difficult to implement.

What do the other (real) experts think?

CarloSW2
well the front passenger seats are basically lazy boys. and they are ridiculously hard to remove, so I am not doing that.

no, no cylinder deactivation I honestly do not know how that works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peakster
Those ETCs are really nice cars. Cadillac Northstar, right? I would've thought the aluminum engine would be more efficient.

Oh I know.

Yes mine was one of the good years with the 4.6 northstar. But when you think about its 4.6 liter engine puts out 295 hp/tq and still manages 15-25mpg I say thats tuned pretty well, it is also tuned for performance rather than FE.


as far as FE is concerned it does have room for improvement.
__________________
"what gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. Its what we know for sure that just ain't so." ~Mark Twain
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 07:06 AM   #16 (permalink)
ECO-Evolution
 
Lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,482

Iron Horse (retired) - '97 Iron horse Intrepid

Ninja - '08 Kawasaki 250R
90 day: 76.23 mpg (US)
Thanks: 17
Thanked 43 Times in 32 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by capn View Post
what kind of increase in FE did you see? I have figured that I can stay under 2500 rpms and still have decent acceleration, but thats a pretty light throttle.
It was about 3%.
__________________
"Judge a person by their questions rather than their answers."

  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 08:42 PM   #17 (permalink)
Giant Moving Eco-Wall
 
DifferentPointofView's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Dale, IL (or A-Dale)
Posts: 1,120

The Jeep! - '95 Jeep Grand Cherokee ZJ Laredo
90 day: 23.75 mpg (US)

The Caliber - '07 Dodge Caliber R/T
90 day: 30.6 mpg (US)

The 'Scort - '98 Ford Escort LX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
You can definitely improve. as far as a restrictor plate, it won't really help, because you do know that at 60mph your car makes about 20hp right? Max horsepower is measured usually in the upper 4600+ range, which is something you'll probably not see.

Well anyway, welcome to Ecomodder! There's plenty of big cars and trucks around here.
__________________


Yea.. I drive a Jeep and I'm on a fuel economy site, but you just wouldn't understand... "It's a Jeep thing!" *Jeep Wave*

Did I Use Too Many Abbreviations? Here's The Abbreviations List
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2008, 12:00 PM   #18 (permalink)
Ecomod noob
 
zjrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tooele, UT
Posts: 412

ZJ - '95 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo Upcountry
90 day: 20.57 mpg (US)

Neon - '03 Dodge Neon SE
90 day: 33.46 mpg (US)

S'Crew - '02 Ford F150 Supercrew XLT
90 day: 16.4 mpg (US)

Ranger - '90 Ford Ranger
Last 3: 28.02 mpg (US)

Not the Jeep - '03 Dodge Neon SE
90 day: 34.11 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Hey, if I can coax 21.8 out of my 4x4 Grand Cherokee, you ought to be able to do pretty good with the Caddy. The biggest adjustment is in HOW you drive and how you think about driving...

__________________
When it comes to Heroes, RENEGADES are mine!
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com